Ozrodders.com

Dave wrote.

Dave wrote:Re the wagons the top car has a chassis, the bottom car does not. To be accepted it must have a chassis so the bottom one misses out because that is what the handbook says! To be accepted the bottom car would not a lot more modifications to achieve the necessary points (130) to take it into Mild Custom class, where a chassis is not a requirement. But that is a whole other argument which has been discussed here many times over! Can we keep this thread about the handbook itself rather than arguing the rules within it. For the record we never had 32-36 3 window Ford coupes, 39-48 Ford coupes, 36-39 Chev coupes or lots of other now popular bodies either! There have been U.S imports for a very long time and that will likely continue. The fact they are accepted under the rules are part of the reason for their popularity, but that is one of the byproducts of the rules within the handbook, but again that is a whole other subject!

Dave, I know what the rulebook says & I firmly believe that the rulebook requires change in relation to the Custom Classic class.
I also think that my comments are valid because the rules within the rulebook in fact make the rulebook.

I realise that the thought behind this thread is " where is the bloody rulebook ". I've just realised that mine is most likely up to date. I thought that I must have been a SLACKARSE because the last amendment in mine is Oct.2002. Amendments used to come on a regular basis, the previous in mine being--Nov.2001,Nov.1998,Aug.1997& Apr.1997.
Why has it taken so long for a rewrite? I know that Mark has touched on this BUT please ,10 years.
To quote FCCOOL." I think it's worth whatever it takes to preserve our own rod & custom history, we should stop forgeting our own rod & custom history and stop trying to be american, we also need to remember what a custom is."
I don't know if a TOTAL rewrite of the rulebook is being done BUT If it is then maybe its not necessary. The one section that is constantly being discussed seems to be that of the Custom Classic class.
Mark has ,I think given a fairly good insight into the reasons why there is such a dilemma with the Custom Classic/Custom classes but we need to move on.

Mark Saunders wrote:I disagree with Dave, I think this kind of discussion about the content is exactly what is needed in this thread."
So the "custom classic" class is a class for classic vehicles in the pre-65 grouping.
The chassis clause was added to that class in the 80's as the members WANTED to exclude aussie cars
So the first thing to understand is we didn't "accidentally" include fairly standard yanky cars and exclude aussie cars...... we did it deliberately
The reason dates back to beyond my involvement, but I have heard it was done because we wanted to keep the indoor show type events full of US based iron, and exclude aussie cars, because the punters were there to see US iron, not the stuff they could see at the supermarket car park.

Mark
The problem now is that you can see these cars in your supermarket car park therefore that argument doesn't wash any longer.
Ken.

All fair comments Ken, and nothing much has changed in five years from the members perspective

A lot of work has been done on the handbook, but a final hasn't been presented to the NCC for review

ACT DC will chase it up, and report back

On the chassiless thing, I still think the easiest thing is to remove all the words from the custom classic definition, and replace them with words saying that a custom classic is "a vehicle manufactured before 31 Dec 1964 and that scores less than 130 points on the modification list

Then close to stock chassisless can park next too their chassied counterparts

The mild and radical custom chassisless can ALREADY do so

Pretty simple change really.
We just need the numbers

Mark Saunders wrote:OK.....now too tackle the aussie custom thing

So read the handbook and suggest specific changes ....... not just vague ideas

I would love to read the handbook.....................where do I get one??

At the start of this thread is about the best version we are going to get I think!

I have just been informed that the ASRF have now posted a Handbook on their web site, though I believe it is available to members only. We will review whether we leave this up once we know some more.

Dave wrote:I have just been informed that the ASRF have now posted a Handbook on their web site, though I believe it is available to members only. We will review whether we leave this up once we know some more.

WOW! Check out the list of stuff on the "documents" page for members

- ASRF Incorporation Certificate
- ASRF Constitution – September 2011
- ASRF Street Rodders Handbook
- ASRF Club Affiliation Application Pack
- ASRF Sanction Application
- ASRF Public Liabilty Certicate of Currency
- ASRF Club Grant Criteria/Application
- ASRF Financial Report F2012

Well done to whoever got this up and running!

FYI - have just done a very quick comparison between the two documents and the one now published in the members area of the ASRF website is definitely in a different format to the one at the start of the post (pictures and title blocks etc removed). Please note that I have not done a content comparison.

NosFEratu wrote: Well done to whoever got this up and running!

Absolutely! Credit should be given when due so well done to those responsible! Let us hope this is just the beginning of a whole new way of communicating and coming into the modern world.

NosFEratu wrote:FYI - have just done a very quick comparison between the two documents and the one now published in the members area of the ASRF website is definitely in a different format to the one at the start of the post (pictures and title blocks etc removed). Please note that I have not done a content comparison.

It looks like the one that was circulated to the NCC about a year ago, that still needed some content added back in from older versions

More up to date than the last printed ones, but we believed it still needed more revisions

Certainly progress getting it on the site

I'll ring and thank the webmaster tomorrow

Dave wrote:

NosFEratu wrote: Well done to whoever got this up and running!

Absolutely! Credit should be given when due so well done to those responsible! Let us hope this is just the beginning of a whole new way of communicating and coming into the modern world.

amen.

well done and long overdue for those of living and working remotely.

FCCOOL wrote: Thanks, ive been trying to find that for years, i just scrape in around 130 points classing it as a mild custom wich is what i would call it, some of the points seem a bit out when defining a custom from that era, its a bit sad to see 20 points for 4 link and 0 points for sectioning, 5 points if body is changed to take different indicators but 10 points if you fit a different seat.

i find it even more odd that "dechroming the sides of your vehicle" gets you 10 points, but restoring stainless trims isnt even mentioned.

what is this, 1992 california? favour a so cal style 100% yellow 32 ford coupe with moonies? maybe sylbester stallone had a hand in the points classification after driving that merc in "cobra".

yuk.

Pro wrote: i find it even more odd that "dechroming the sides of your vehicle" gets you 10 points, but restoring stainless trims isnt even mentioned.what is this, 1992 california? favour a so cal style 100% yellow 32 ford coupe with moonies? maybe sylbester stallone had a hand in the points classification after driving that merc in "cobra".
yuk.

might be just the way Im looking at it but restoring what was there isnt a mod, removing it and filling all the holes is a pain and worth the points. Making new, different stainless should score?

Can anyone tell me if the maximum points for each class has been modified since this thread started? (ie. is it still 130 and under for classic, 130 plus for mild and 180 plus for radical?)

Thanks

No changes.

As Mark said "NO CHANGES"

Tassie Dave